ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2024
Validity between signs and symptoms of sleep bruxism against a validated portable electromyographic device.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sleep bruxism and daily life behaviors in university students: a cross-sectional analysis of free time management, sedentary behaviors, and smartphone use.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Sleep Bruxism and Occlusal Function: A Case-Control Study Based on Polysomnography in Young Colombians.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Tooth Grinding in Older Adults: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study.Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric DentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sleep bruxism is a major research area in dentistry today and needs valid clinical means of diagnosis against valid instrumental methods. Purpose: To assess the validity of the most commonly reported sleep bruxism (SB) signs and symptoms in the literature against a polysomnography (PSG) validated portable electromyographic (EMG) device (BiteStrip®). Material and Methods: Fifty young adults (40 women & 10 men, 18-30 years old) volunteered for the sequential and simultaneous administration of the SB signs and symptoms questionnaire versus the BiteStrip®. The SB signs and symptoms questionnaire was comprised of 19 items divided in 5 areas: a) Area 1: self-awareness of tooth grinding, clenching, and/or tooth sounds/noises, b) Area 2: headaches and/or facial pain, c) Area 3: muscle fatigue and/or hypertrophy, d) Area 4: clicking, crepitation and/or locking in the TMJ, and e) Area 5: tooth sensitivity, tooth wear/breaking, and/or cheek/tongue indentations. A cross-tabulation between the dichotomic test results (positive = 1, negative = 0) between the all five SB areas separately using quartiles (positive test result=75th percentile or higher, negative test result=50th percentile or lower) versus a positive test result of the BiteStrip® (score=1 or higher) was performed. Results: Area 1 presented the highest sensitivity for SB screening (80.0%), but with low specificity (51.4%), diagnosing most SB cases, but with a high number of false positives. All other four areas had low sensitivity (range=37.9% to 58.6%) and screening capacity and are only useful if Area 1 is positive. Conclusions: Commonly reported SB signs and symptoms are not valid diagnostic measurements and can only be used as a screening method for either 'possible' or 'probable' SB diagnosis.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.